# The Stables, Underriver House Road, Underriver, Sevenoaks

- **Decision:** allowed, 24 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: John Pearce
- **Authority:** Sevenoaks (South East)
- **Appeal reference:** 6011192
- **Application reference:** 26/00135/FUL
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Two-stable block in a field (building only; no change of use of land)
- **Site context:** green-belt, national-landscape, open-countryside, rural-lane
- **Green Belt:** yes
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** N4, GB7(1)(f)(iv)
- **Development plan policies:** Sevenoaks Allocations and Development Management Plan 2015 EN5, LT2
- **Main issues:** landscape and scenic beauty of the Kent Downs National Landscape
- **Tags:** equestrian, national-landscape, not-inappropriate, non-determination, costs-application, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework, drafting-slip, tier-2

## Summary
A small two-stable block in a field at Underriver, in the Kent Downs National Landscape and the Green Belt, was allowed on a non-determination appeal. The inspector found the low, dark-stained building, tucked by the access and hedges, would conserve the landscape and scenic beauty under N4. It was an outdoor recreation facility with minimised openness impact under GB7(1)(f)(iv).

## Issues and findings
- **Transition.** "the parties have been provided with an opportunity to comment on the revised Framework" (DL ¶5).
- **National Landscape, N4: PASS.** "visibility is not analogous to harm and whilst the building would be detached from other development in the area, the stables would be of a scale and design that would be sensitive to the rural setting of the site" (DL ¶10). "the proposal would conserve landscape and scenic beauty in the NL" (DL ¶12).
- **Green Belt, GB7(1)(f)(iv): PASS.** "given the limited scale of the building and its discreet position, the impact on the openness of the Green Belt would be minimised and there would not be a significant conflict with the Green Belt purposes" (DL ¶14).
- **Earlier dismissal distinguished.** The earlier stable "would be a sizeable structure" set back from the road; this one is smaller and in the corner (DL ¶11).

## Planning balance
None expressly. N4 and GB7(1)(f)(iv) met, no other harm (flooding, contamination, highways dealt with by conditions), so allowed (DL ¶15–16, ¶26).

## What made the difference
Scale and siting: two stables with a low ridge by the existing access and hedgerow, rather than the larger isolated building dismissed in 2015. Conditions on private use, no lighting and no paraphernalia kept the effect small.

## Transferable points
- Under N4, visibility is not the same as harm; a small, sensitively sited and finished building can conserve a National Landscape (DL ¶10).
- A small private stable is an outdoor recreation facility under GB7(1)(f)(iv) where openness impact is minimised (DL ¶13–14).
- A condition limiting stables to ponies fails the tests where the land can support horses (DL ¶25).

## Policy findings
- **N4: pass.** small, low, black-stained timber stable near the access and hedgerows; visible from the lane but "visibility is not analogous to harm"; conserves landscape and scenic beauty of Kent Downs NL; LURA s245 duty (DL 7-12)
- **GB7(1)(f)(iv): pass.** outdoor recreation facility; openness impact minimised; no significant conflict with purposes, including encroachment; Council agreed (DL 13-14)
- **TR6(4): pass.** existing lawful access; insignificant vehicle movements (DL 16)
- **BNG (Sch 7A TCPA): not-engaged.** de minimis exemption agreed (under 25 sq m, no priority habitat); letter says "there is reason for me to disagree" (evidently meaning no reason) (DL 20)
- **DM6: pass.** ponies-only condition not reasonable or necessary; private-use, no-lighting and no-paraphernalia conditions imposed (DL 24-25)

## Key facts
- Non-determination appeal; Council's statement argued for refusal (DL 3)
- Earlier stables appeal on the site dismissed (APP/G2245/W/15/3031307, larger and set back) and a dog-walking field appeal (APP/G2245/W/23/3314956) distinguished (DL 11)
- Enforcement notice on removed hardstanding remains in force for its own matters (DL 18)
- Costs application made; separate decision (DL 2)
- No S5(5) balance expressly run after the GB7 pass

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6011192

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6011192.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.